How on earth is a foul cheating? An accidental handball is a foul, as is a tackle that's fractionally late or whatever else. Yes, dragging down a player on their way to goal is cheating (sort of), which is why it's usually punished by a red card, but playing in a physical manner, tackling hard to impose physical pressure and slow opposition run and giving away the odd foul is perfectly legitimate, while pretending to be fouled when you aren't certainly isn't.

Actually, strictly speaking, an accidental handball isn't a foul. FIFA's Law 12 states "A direct free kick is also awarded to the opposing team if a player handles the ball deliberately (except for the goalkeeper within his own penalty area)."

The whole issue is murky because the law doesn't really define what is "deliberate". Referees have to judge intent which is, by definition, a subjective call.

"The PFA does not represent players when they have broken the law and been convicted on non-football matters."- Gordon Taylor in 2009 following Marlon King's release after a prison sentence for sexual assault & ABH

How on earth is a foul cheating? An accidental handball is a foul, as is a tackle that's fractionally late or whatever else. Yes, dragging down a player on their way to goal is cheating (sort of), which is why it's usually punished by a red card, but playing in a physical manner, tackling hard to impose physical pressure and slow opposition run and giving away the odd foul is perfectly legitimate, while pretending to be fouled when you aren't certainly isn't.

Handball is only an offence if deliberate

If you foul someone, you are breaking the rules. Breaking the rules = cheating. Therefore, foul=cheating.

A physical game isn't cheating. You can play physically without fouling. but a team who constantly foul the opposition will always be branded cheats.

Why is diving worse? You dive to win a free-kick. You foul a player to prevent him gaining a territorial advantage, or making a pass, or shooting. Both offences are done in the interests of your own team. both are just as bad as each other.

If you foul someone, you are breaking the rules. Breaking the rules = cheating. Therefore, foul=cheating.

A physical game isn't cheating. You can play physically without fouling. but a team who constantly foul the opposition will always be branded cheats.

Why is diving worse? You dive to win a free-kick. You foul a player to prevent him gaining a territorial advantage, or making a pass, or shooting. Both offences are done in the interests of your own team. both are just as bad as each other.

But you don't always foul a player to give your team an advantage. Most fouls are genuine attempts to win the ball - say going in for a tackle but mistiming it slightly and taking the player. The only fouls that could fairly be called cheating are the professional fouls - deliberate handballs, tugging a shirt to stop someone breaking away etc.

He’s thrown a kettle over a pub, what have you done?

- Gareth Keenan from "The Office"

*****Winner***** of the 2006 FIFA World Cup predictions thread...see you in four years' time?

But you don't always foul a player to give your team an advantage. Most fouls are genuine attempts to win the ball - say going in for a tackle but mistiming it slightly and taking the player. The only fouls that could fairly be called cheating are the professional fouls - deliberate handballs, tugging a shirt to stop someone breaking away etc.

Okay I accept your point there but I still maintain that team that constantly fouls are a team that cheats.

I've generally been fairly impressed with the standard thus far, with the exceptions of the Mexican gentleman who reffed England-Paraguay & the Russian who took charge of France-Switzerland.

It may or may not be coincidental these have been comfortably the worst games of the tournament to date....

Have to agree with you . Although the Egyptian ref of Aus v Jap should probably not be designated for the next round for fear of causing more and more controversy .

Any one can err, but to be insecure in their error is far greater offence , IMHO. He will be under even more pressure in subsequent rounds and will struggle to gain player respect in the way he has gone on both during the game and after, IMO.

If you foul someone, you are breaking the rules. Breaking the rules = cheating. Therefore, foul=cheating.

A physical game isn't cheating. You can play physically without fouling. but a team who constantly foul the opposition will always be branded cheats.

Why is diving worse? You dive to win a free-kick. You foul a player to prevent him gaining a territorial advantage, or making a pass, or shooting. Both offences are done in the interests of your own team. both are just as bad as each other.

As Redman said, that's assuming that all fouls are professional fouls. To use a cricket comparison, bowling a no ball and taking a wicket with it is outside of the rules of the game, but it isn't cheating, as it is is expected and there is an available punishment (being a run penalty and the reversal of the wciket) for people who do it. Claiming a catch you didn't take is cheating, while bowling a no ball isn't. Simple.

A professional foul designed to prevent a goal is certainly a serious violation of the rules, but that's what the red card is for. Indeed, most genuinely professional fouls which are just designed to cut run and not to win the ball will be carded. It's simply a trade-off for a team that does it. A foul which is an attempt to win the ball is a perfectly legitimate part of the game, as are fouls where the attempt is to simply to halt the ball carrier if winning the ball is impossible (different from dragging down a player who doesn't have the ball, obviously). It's a trade-off between the danger of a free kick and/or a card, and letting the player roam free, and teams that foul a lot are simply using a different tactical approach.

Diving is a totally different issue, and is basically equivalent to "simulation" in any other kind of sport. It's an attempt to cheat your opposition by having them punished for an offence they didn't commit, and players who do it are operating outside of the spirit of the contest, imo. I don't think you can say that about teams that foul.

A foul which is an attempt to win the ball is a perfectly legitimate part of the game, as are fouls where the attempt is to simply to halt the ball carrier if winning the ball is impossible (different from dragging down a player who doesn't have the ball, obviously). It's a trade-off between the danger of a free kick and/or a card, and letting the player roam free, and teams that foul a lot are simply using a different tactical approach.

Diving is a totally different issue, and is basically equivalent to "simulation" in any other kind of sport. It's an attempt to cheat your opposition by having them punished for an offence they didn't commit, and players who do it are operating outside of the spirit of the contest, imo. I don't think you can say that about teams that foul.

A deliberate foul is cheating regardless of the circumstances. Diving isn't cheating any more than tripping a player up, diving is an attempt to gain advantage for your team, a foul is an attempt to stop another team holding possession. And when a player commits a foul, he always does it hoping he won't get caught. It is cheating. This is why a team like Blackburn Rovers are referred to as a team of cheats constantly. They have very few players who would dream of diving but they kick the hell out of the opposition.

Have to agree, the referee was a disgrace. Japan should have had a penalty, Cahill would have got his second yellow, they would have converted it, World Cup dream over for Australia et cetera et cetera. Is that what he is moaning about?